Reds claim Freddy Galvis off waivers

[jerb]

 

Shi Davidi

@ShiDavidi

 

#Reds claim shortstop Freddy Galvis off waivers from #BlueJays, per industry source.

[sdyment]

.........?

[Todd Van Anus]

That sucks, but there was really no spot for him long-term.

[Todd Van Anus]

.........?

Good point but I disagree.

[sdyment]

Was he dfa’d? Demoted? How did I miss that...?

[Barkerfan23]

Lol what

[Brownie19]

I'm going to need some help to figure this out. Revocable waivers were eliminated right? Did we place him on irrevocable waivers, knowing he'd be claimed with the intent of trading him (even though we have no leverage because we can't pull him back if we don't like the deal?)

[THANOS]

Ok.. Can someone more knowledgeable about the new trade deadline explain what this means?

 

Can we still pull him off waivers? I imagine we cannot trade him with the waiver deadline gone?

[Nofunatall]

Was he dfa’d? Demoted? How did I miss that...?

 

Yah same I don't remember seeing anything either about a DFA etc. Sure he was the odd guy out now but depth is still a thing even when the season is filler.

[Barkerfan23]

If they wanted to move him for nothing why now

[sdyment]

I’m trying to be patient and see the big picture, but Shatkins’ asset management is really starting to become worrying.

[P2F]

Nothing to see here. Just a message being sent by Atkins that he does not want Montoyo playing Galvis over the kids.

[Dr. Dinger]

Waivers are irrevocable and there is no exchange of assets here. They will simply take on the contract and the player. I’m not really a fan of this move. Galvis was a good defensive player and could mentor the young’ns on professionalism. We save like $1m that will certainly not be reallocated.

[glory]

Nothing to see here. Just a message being sent by Atkins that he does not want Montoyo playing Galvis over the kids.

 

Yup. Ned Montoyost using the DH spot to get Galvis in the lineup everyday was ridiculous.

 

100% the right move by Atkins.

[jerb]

 

Rob Longley

@longleysunsport

 

Source says Jays worked hard to move Galvis to a contender at deadline. Team was appreciative of his influence on young teammates.

[THANOS]

Waivers are irrevocable and there is no exchange of assets here. They will simply take on the contract and the player. I’m not really a fan of this move. Galvis was a good defensive player and could mentor the young’ns on professionalism. We save like $1m that will certainly not be reallocated.

 

Thanks for the clarity. So I guess we just did him a service to join a contender and saved peanuts as a result. I'm with you, seems pointless, and he had intangible value he could have added with Bichette and Biggio, etc.

[Ziggyy108]

I liked having Galvis. Thought he'd be a great guy to have on the bench next year.

 

Can we please at least dump Smoak too

[Krylian]

Nothing to see here. Just a message being sent by Atkins that he does not want Montoyo playing Galvis over the kids.

 

Although I do think that they could've gotten some kind of asset for Galvis at the deadline, and I'm not a fan of letting him go for nothing, if the message is 'I'm taking your Toys away from you and forcing you to play the kids', I support that message.

[Brownie19]

I hate assuming, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was some discontent on Galvis' behalf. He's always been an starter who plays everyday. The Jays could have picked up his $5M option in the offseason and tried to deal him - but in reality, he isn't worth anything anymore because his defense is just good now (instead of great, which it was in 2016 and 2017). Iglesias is superior to Galvis and he was DFA'd this past offseason and had to accept a minor league invite IIRC.

 

Will be curious to see if more comes out on this story. Maybe some stuff happening behind closed doors - maybe just the Jays doing him a solid so he can catch on and play more on another team. He's only a great guy to have on your bench if he accepts and embraces that role. If he's pissed off, wanting to start than he can become a distraction.

[glory]

I would have been fine keeping Galvis next year if he was used as a bench player. He'd have value as a vetrin and is actually a productive player so he would have been great depth. But Montoyo F'd that up by playing him everyday even when he has an entire infield of top prospects at his disposal, and someone like Drury on the bench who needs more playing time to see if he's worth anything beyond this season. Now just do the same with Smoak and Buntoyo will have no choice but to play the youngsters.

 

Another thing to keep in mind is that $5.5m for 1-2 WAR infielder is above market value, and the Jays would have been using him off the bench. I don't think Galvis was much of an asset.

[Ray]

I think we could've gotten something worthwhile for Galvis in the offseason. The Phillies got Enyel de los Santos for him before.

 

I understand doing the guy a solid and moving him to where he can get everyday SS reps though.

[ColdPint]

I think it’s about time to bring Rowdy back up - has has earned a second shot with the numbers he’s put up since going back to AAA.

[Jonn]

I mean it makes a s*** load of sense for him to be gone I’m just absolutely shocked we couldn’t get atleast a lottery ticket for him at the deadline.

 

Hopefully someone claims Smoak as well. Galvis staying made some semblance of sense with his team friendly option. Smoak doesn’t. Clear up those AB’s please.

[43211234]

I don't understand this one. Just let him sit a couple times a week for another month and a half and trade him in the offseason.

[Todd]

So what happens now if one of the so called kids get hurt. Now the team has nobody to take his spot.

Other stupid move by the blue jays. They go's 18 homeruns if not more

[Jimcanuck]

Weird, but it will be good to see what AA can do

[Olerud363]

Reds: "Hi Ross, as you may have noticed, or maybe not since you seem oblivious to the current market, we are very much in the business of giving away intriguing prospects for questionable veterans with only a year or even half a year of control left. What would you want for Galvis?"

 

Atkins: "Nothing. We like his veteran presence."

 

Reds: "Uhh but you have Bo Biche..."

 

Atkins: *click*

 

Atkins: "Hey this Bichette kid is pretty good. Good thing our super elite manager can find other ways to get Freddy's bat in the lineup!"

 

Shapiro: "I'm cutting Galvis."

 

The only thing I can think is that the analytics say Urena and Galvis are the same player except Urena isn't an "established vet" so he can play twice a week.

 

Not sure what Urena's defense projects to be... his minor league career looks better than Galvis'

[Grant77]

I'm perplexed as to why a 1.4 WAR player on a 4 million salary and a good clubhouse guy could not be traded for anything.

[Pendleton]

19 clubs passed on a free Galvis before the Reds would have been able to claim him. Very possible there was nothing being offered.

 

I can buy the argument that it makes more sense to keep him if there's no trade to be made, but I guess management wants all that playing time going to young players and wants to pinch some pennies.

[BTS]

I don’t get this. Galvis was a perfect Util guy to keep around next year. He can backup Vlad at 3B, Biggio at 2B, and Bichette at SS. That’s a very nice bench piece for 5.5M, and he probably still would have gotten 400+ PA. Now we’ll get to see more Richard Urena or some other trash bag.